The Regents of the University of California v. Boston Scientific Corporation, 16-CV-6266 YGR. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180126g55
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jan. 26, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 26, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND EXTEND DEADLINES DKT. NO. 77 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . The Court is in receipt of the parties' Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines and Continue Trial Date filed January 22, 2018. (Dkt. No. 77.) The Court DENIES the request to continue the trial date and related deadlines. Trial continuances are disfavored. The burden and disruption that result "counsel[] against continuances except for compelling reasons." Morris v.
Summary: ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND EXTEND DEADLINES DKT. NO. 77 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . The Court is in receipt of the parties' Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines and Continue Trial Date filed January 22, 2018. (Dkt. No. 77.) The Court DENIES the request to continue the trial date and related deadlines. Trial continuances are disfavored. The burden and disruption that result "counsel[] against continuances except for compelling reasons." Morris v. S..
More
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND EXTEND DEADLINES
DKT. NO. 77
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
The Court is in receipt of the parties' Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines and Continue Trial Date filed January 22, 2018. (Dkt. No. 77.) The Court DENIES the request to continue the trial date and related deadlines. Trial continuances are disfavored. The burden and disruption that result "counsel[] against continuances except for compelling reasons." Morris v. Slappy, 461 U.S. 1, 11 (1983); accord Payne v. Jones, 711 F.3d 85, 92 (2d Cir. 2013); see, e.g., California Rule of Court 3.1332(c) (listing circumstances that may support trial continuance).
Here, not even a minimal showing was made. New counsel, hired last fall, must have been aware that the case had a trial date set for February 4, 2019. If counsel could not commit to the date, they should not have accepted the engagement. The Court will consider a request to extend dates not related to the trial specifically, or any motion practice, as long as the parties understand that moving such deadlines may mean that they may have to dual-track motion practice and trial preparation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
